Behind every member of Congress is a small cadre of staffers, without whom lawmakers’ jobs would be impossible. They craft legislation, are experts in arcane policy, maintain hectic schedules, and help ensure that constituents get served by the government they pay for.
But cuts to office budgets — down 20 percent over the past three years alone — and changes to employee health care, along with near-constant threats of furloughs and shutdowns, have eroded morale on Capitol Hill, and more senior staffers are looking toward the exits than in the past, according to a new survey released Monday by the Congressional Management Foundation.
Congress may not work very well these days, but things would be much much worse if it was no longer able to attract top talent and retain the unique institutional knowledge that longtime aides possess.
CMF, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that provides management consulting for members’ offices, surveyed 163 House and Senate chiefs of staffs and district or state directors in late 2013 under the promise of anonymity. The results are troubling.
Thirty-eight percent of senior staffers surveyed said it was “likely” they would look for a job outside their current office in the next year, up 8 percentage points from the last survey, in 2011. Meanwhile, the percentage saying it was unlikely they’d look for a new job fell 13 points from 64 percent to 51 percent, a bare majority.
“When you look at the landscape of changes, these are the most significant changes to congressional offices in a generation,” Brad Fitch, the president and CEO of the foundation told National Journal. “It’s a folly to think that those changes are not going to have an impact on staff retention or recruitment.”
In addition to budget cuts, many staffers are losing their federal employee health benefits and being forced to purchase coverage through the insurance exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act, a change Republicans pushed for political reasons. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., and others even tried unsuccessfully to pass legislation eliminating staffers’ health insurance subsidy, while another GOP senator recently brought a lawsuit to do the same.
Respondents to the survey were encouraged to provide candid thoughts on life as a senior aide, and many said the health insurance change and budget cuts have had a tremendous negative impact on their lives and offices. “The most damaging action or lack thereof to morale I have witnessed in my 40-year career as a committee staffer and [chief of staff] for three members was the refusal not only to address the staff health care mistake but to fix it,” one said.
Said another: “I hired well to build a competent staff for a senior member. As a result of the sequester, I’m losing those staff to off-Hill positions that pay sometimes double what pay on the Hill is, with more certainty and no furloughs. This is a horrible situation.”
Cuts have forced managers to do more with less, straining resources and patience. In 2011, 30 percent of respondents agreed that they have “too much to do to do everything well” — that number doubled in the 2013 survey, jumping to 62 percent. Meanwhile, the percentage saying “job burnout is a significant problem in my office” climbed 10 percentage points, from 30 percent to 40 percent.
And the decline of in-house resources creates a vacuum that can be filled by outside groups such as think tanks and lobbyists, aides fear. “The elimination of staff’s traditional health care has been a complete disaster,” one staffer said. “If you wanted a legislative branch run by K Street lobbyists and 25-year-old staffers, mission accomplished.”
Of course, congressional aides have always been underpaid and overworked, but they keep coming back because of a commitment to public service or a desire to have an impact. But there may be a point when salary and budget cuts go too far, even for the most service-oriented. “Is there a breaking point at some point where Capitol Hill becomes significantly less attractive and private sector is more attractive, or an entirely different career?” Fitch wonders.
For any American interested in fixing Congress and having representatives who can perform their jobs well, let’s hope we haven’t already reached that point.
What We're Following See More »
"The Senate standstill over a stopgap spending bill appeared headed toward a resolution on Friday night. Senators who were holding up the measure said votes are expected later in the evening. West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin had raised objections to the continuing resolution because it did not include a full year's extension of retired coal miners' health benefits," but Manchin "said he and other coal state Democrats agreed with Senate Democratic leaders during a caucus meeting Thursday that they would not block the continuing resolution, but rather use the shutdown threat as a way to highlight the health care and pension needs of the miners."
Donald Trump transition team announced Friday afternoon that top supporter Rudy Giuliani has taken himself out of the running to be in Trump's cabinet, though CNN previously reported that it was Trump who informed the former New York City mayor that he would not be receiving a slot. While the field had seemingly been narrowed last week, it appears to be wide open once again, with ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson the current favorite.
The House has completed it's business for 2016 by passing a spending bill which will keep the government funded through April 28. The final vote tally was 326-96. The bill's standing in the Senate is a bit tenuous at the moment, as a trio of Democratic Senators have pledged to block the bill unless coal miners get a permanent extension on retirement and health benefits. The government runs out of money on Friday night.
The Senate passed the National Defense Authorization Act today, sending the $618 billion measure to President Obama. The president vetoed the defense authorization bill a year ago, but both houses could override his disapproval this time around.